MADHESI ISSUE AS A CAUSE OF FUTURE SOCIAL CONFLICT IN SIKKIM

THIS IS REPRODUCED WITHOUT EDITING.
USEFUL BIT OF HISTORICAL ANALYSIS AND IS ESPECIALLY RELEVANT TO CREATORS OF GORKHALAND WHO WISH TO ENLIST THE SUPPORT OF THE PLAINS PEOPLE COMMUNITY IN FORMATION OF THEIR DREAM OF GORKHALAND.
FOR ANY LONG TERM SOLOUTION THE MADHESI POPULATION MUST BE ENLISTED AS AN EQUAL PARTNER FROM THE INCEPTION OTHERWISE THE STATE WILL HEAD FOR EVENTUAL SPLIT AGAIN --THAT IF IT CAN BE CREATED WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF THE MADHESI COMMUNITY.


Madhesi Issue: Deep Rooted?-Bal Krishna Jha(The author is a freelance writer, and can be reached atbalkrishnajha@gmail.com)


After the end of World Wars, there has been exponential increase inintra state wars and conflicts. Such conflicts are results ofaccumulation of various inter-wined factors of social psychology, andhence, the exact cause of such conflict cannot be pin-pointed.However, it can be argued that there always exists a real or perceiveddiscrimination component in any genuine conflict.The magnitude of conflict is directly proportional to the magnitude ofemotional attachment to the issue, multiplied by the perceived degreeof discrimination by the warring groups regarding distribution ofeconomic, political, social and other resources. When measured on thecontinuum of magnitude and graveness, it is 'Deep-Rooted' conflictthat takes the first position.Deep rooted conflicts originate largely within states (unlike interstate wars), and combine two powerful elements: identity-based factorsthat are emotionally charged and the sense of injustice anddiscrimination. Identity factors are based on differences in race,religion, culture, language etc. Among these two, the identity crisishas much more to contribute in magnitude and persistence of theconflict. Out of twenty seven major armed conflicts (greater than onethousand deaths per year) in 1996, twenty two had a clear identitycomponent in them. Complexity, persistency and intractability are thebasic characteristics of deep-rooted conflictsThe intra state conflicts in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, pre 70s muslimsconflict in India, Bosnia, former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Afghanistan, etcare the examples of deep rooted conflicts. Thee conflicts are complexin nature which doesn't have a simple quick-fix formula to solution.Moreover, the foreign and regional powers' interests on stability ofthe country give quite fierce and unpredictable shape to it. Most ofthe intra state conflict have spilled to become inter state cold warsor even full fledged.Let us ponder over some home issues related to conflict:

Is Madhesi issue of Nepal going to bring in deep rooted conflict?

Are our leadersfaking to be ignorant about the graveness and further provoking suchconflict? Is the media responsible?The Madhesi issue is a deep-rooted issue. The practice of state'sfavourism for the ethnic groups of pahad/hill/mountain and itsdiscrimination towards those who are non-pahadis has brought aboutthis crisis. The state's age old practice of discrimination has beengiven continuity by the current democratic governments, politicalparties and media, all of them headed by those belonging to thefavoured lot. Due to this, Madhesis cannot compete fairly with therest. They feel no sense of equality. Only those Madhesis who havehidden or maneuvered their identity have been able to get into stateorgans though with frowned dignity. Otherwise, all the remaining is atloss of their identical dignity and hence there is a clear identitycrisis.Recently, the leaders of big political parties who claim to be ofnational stature, feel that the reason the Madhesis have demanded afederal autonomous state is to disintegrate the country. By suchstatements, it is clear that they are unable to see the Madhesicrisis. It is because they are still using their old lenses and nevercared to borrow a Madhesi lens. Therefore, they are puzzled as to whythis issue has caught up velocity in very short time (two or threeyears). I would like to remind such people of the ethnic conflict informer Yugoslavia in 1990 where the conflict was suppressed for fiftyyears and was presumed that everything was fine, normal and undercontrol. However, the Eastern Bloc failed to notice that the emotionalconflict was always there and unresolved. This led to manifestation ofhuge conflict after fifty years!The so called 'national' parties have a myopic vision and are livingin a hallucinatory and imaginative world. They think that they are theones who have been given responsibility of guarding the sovereignty ofthe country, and all 'others' are squatters who have settled therewith intention to disintegrate their personal property. This attitudewill never let them understand the madhesi crisis and their reflexwill always find ways to alienate them. For example, the CommunistParty of Nepal (UML) including other non-madhes based parties areactively trying to prove that this issue is artificial and isprovoking some quarters of madhesis to get disassociated with themadhesis' demands. May be they fear to share the pie which they hadbeen relishing alone since inception. By labeling this genuine crisisas artificial and trying to dilute it by promoting the practice of'divide and rule', the state leaders might be close to a short termpain relief, but certainly far from finding permanent cure to theproblem.Suppression can never be a solution to any deep-rooted crisis. Theconflict in Nepal is bound to be grave because the Madhesis take thisas a fight for personal and social dignity and equality and hence,have associated emotional component. On the other side, thediscriminatory practice has been ever growing and institutionalizedinto the culture and lifestyle of almost all the remaining population– the 'Non-Madhesis' of Nepal.The negotiators are always tempted to go by the short stability thanto search a long term sustainability to diffuse the conflict. Theshort term approaches are good to save immediate loss of lives andresources but do not guarantee permanent peace. It is also astatistical fact that most of such short term cures have failed withinfive years of settlement. The negotiators should not be tempted topush for superficial success to reach to any agreement for the sake ofreaching an agreement. It is the quality that is important in suchagreements. Long term stability should not be sacrificed for shortterm expediency.The recent conflict of Maoist Vs State in Nepal was also instigated bythe state's attitude of discrimination. However this discriminationwas in distribution of economic resources. There was less of emotionalcomponent involved and was a logical and simple conflict ofredistribution of resources among all. Now, the conflict is nearly toits logical end in a short span of time, with relatively less loss oflives and resources. The state should learn some lesson from this. Ifthe madhes issue is left uncared then there is a strong possibility ofa new conflict that is bound to be a long lasting, multi-decadestruggle. The new struggle will be proportional in magnitude to thedegree of reluctance of the state to involve the madhesis in powersharing and stop unchecked ethnic discrimination.
Until the negotiating parties do not become sensitive to thegrievances of each other, and genuinely try to find an amicable andsustainable solution, the negotiation doesn't bring any lastingsolution. If negotiation fails, some conflict experts have claimedthat mass expulsion or genocide are the only ways that will make deep-rooted conflicts disappear. In identity based conflicts, partitionbecomes the only way out to further stop the violence, once conflictstarts. Is the country prepared for this path?In deep rooted conflicts, due to the involvement of factors likeidentity, dignity and ego, sustainable solution becomes really hard tofind. Sometimes even the basic democratic process like the rule ofmajority in decision making or even referendum or other democraticprocess that gives verdict in 'yes' or 'no' have negative effects andis detrimental in the settlement process. Therefore, basic democraticvalues as pluralism, tolerance, inclusiveness, negotiation andcompromise must be practiced with perseverance to reach to a solutionthat is based on the spirit of justice and equality like powersharing, autonomy and proportionality. In Angolan conflict, the loserparty of political transition resumed fighting. They judged it as abetter option as that would give them another chance to accomplishtheir deep-rooted objectives, than to stay in the political process ina powerless position.The Moaists who are forming the new government has much moreresponsibility than their predecessors because they are the hope andexpectation of the marginalized groups. The madhesis do not wantconflict, but if similar discrimination is practiced and tactics likedivide and rule is continued by the state or other stakeholders, it isbut the states invitation to conflict. The government has already lostits sincerity by making a mock of the agreements with madhesis twice.It will be impossible for the government to control the situation if athird round of struggle comes in. It is but an inevitable event unlessthe government, media and society understand the severity andsubtleness of the problem and go beyond democratic means to diffusethe crisis.